FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Much More Than a Struggle Over a Brand of Rum

Photo by Richard Smallbone | CC BY 2.0

The arguments that have been taking place for years between the French corporation Pernod Ricard and the U.S.-based Bacardi company since shortly after the triumph of the revolution in Cuba are rooted in political realities that far outstrip the apparent battle for the Bacardi and Havana Club rum brands that have lasted for more than half a century.

The controversy derives from the fact that the Cuban popular victory of 1959, which led to the revolution in power on the island, was followed by, among other popular demands, the inescapable commitments made by the rebels to the people. These included agrarian reform, the literacy campaign, the urban reform, the nationalization of public energy, water, and communications services, and the large industries. The government of the revolution set out to agree mutually satisfactory compensatory solutions with those affected and succeeded in almost all cases.

The then-owners of the Bacardi rum company skillfully managed to register the firm in Bermuda and prepared to resist nationalization. They took the documents and individuals of some of the company’s directors from Cuba. But they were unable to extract the talent and the century-old expertise and inventiveness of the humble teachers and other workers who have made the product of their efforts famous. Neither do the characteristics of water, climate, and other irreplaceable elements.

Then there followed an extensive period of legal disputes in which shipments of the original Bacardi rum from Cuba were systematically confiscated for claims that the counterfeiters were making progress, often through bribes and always supported by pressure from Washington.

Finally, the Court in The Hague ruled that the Bacardi firm should retain the right to the Bacardi brand and the bat symbol, but did not admit that the origin of the product was identified as having been made in Cuba since the previous trade name was ‘Bacardi de Cuba’.

Faced with this situation, the real Cuban producers invited the prestigious French liquor company, Pernod Ricard, to form an association to produce in Cuba and distribute its proven rum throughout the world under the name Havana Club. It’s trademark was registered until 1964 in the United States Patent Office by its previous owner, José Arrechabala, who, following the nationalization of its factory, had renounced the trademark and declined to renew it.

The Arechabala family had founded the distillery in the city of Cárdenas in 1878, and in 1934 sold rum under the name Havana Club in the United States, apparently in contravention of the “prohibition” or “dry law” laws then in force there.

With the acquisition of the “Havana Club” brand by the Pernod Ricard/Cuba Ron consortium and the support of an intensive advertising campaign, sales grew significantly in more than 100 countries. Due to the laws of the imperialist blockade of Cuba, the United States remained the only country in the world where Cuban rum could not be sold.

Alarmed by this situation, the Bacardi organization, which in its relationship with Cuba has always been more oriented towards political reprisals than business, opted to prolong the legal battle by focusing on the use of the Havana Club trademark. To that end, Bacardi tried to present itself as a legitimate purchaser of the rights to the Arechabala family’s trademark. “After the Cuban regime confiscated the Arechabala brand without mercy and by force, Ramón Arechabala personally transcribed the recipe and gave it to Bacardi as an agreement between the two families, both exiled from their homeland,” was his desperate and foolish argument.

In 1999, using its political ties in Washington, Bacardi managed to get Congress to approve the so-called Section 211, which allowed it to market under the brand name “Havana Club” in the USA. This ad hoc legislation was condemned by the World Trade Organisation but has allowed Bacardi to sell a fake ‘Havana Club’ made in Puerto Rico in the United States.

The book “Ron Bacardi: The Hidden War” and the documentary “The Secret of the Bat” show the relationship of the Bacardi company with the ultra-right-wing and Cuban-American mafia in Miami. They also reveal the participation of its team of lawyers in the drafting of the Helms-Burton Act. This law, in 1996, codified all the provisions that had formed the economic blockade of Cuba since 1959 into a single legal instrument so that not even a new US President could abrogate the genocidal siege without the approval of Congress (as happened to Barack Obama).

A CubaNews translation by Walter Lippmann.

 

More articles by:

Manuel E. Yepe is a lawyer, economist and journalist. He is a professor at the Higher Institute of International Relations in Havana.

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

April 23, 2019
Peter Belmont
The Monroe Doctrine is Back, and as the Latest US Attack on Cuba Shows, Its Purpose is to Serve the Neoliberal Order
David Schultz
The Mueller Report: Trump Too Inept to Obstruct Justice
Geoff Beckman
Crazy Uncle Joe and the Can’t We All Just Get Along Democrats
Medea Benjamin
Activists Protect DC Venezuelan Embassy from US-supported Coup
Patrick Cockburn
What Revolutionaries in the Middle East Have Learned Since the Arab Spring
Jim Goodman
Don’t Fall for the Hype of Free Trade Agreements
Lance Olsen
Climate and Forests: Land Managers Must Adapt, and Conservationists, Too
William Minter
The Coming Ebola Epidemic
Tony McKenna
Stephen King’s IT: a 2019 Retrospective
David Swanson
Pentagon Claims 1,100 High Schools Bar Recruiters; Peace Activists Offer $1,000 Award If Any Such School Can Be Found
Gary Olson
A Few Comments on the recent PBS Series: Reconstruction: America After the Civil War
April 22, 2019
Melvin Goodman
The NYTs Tries to Rehabilitate Bloody Gina Haspel
Robert Fisk
After ISIS, a Divided Iraq, Wounded and Grief-Stricken
Binoy Kampmark
Julian Assange as Neuroses
John Laforge
Chernobyl’s Deadly Effects Estimates Vary
Kenneth Surin
Mueller Time? Not for Now
Cesar Chelala
Yemen: The Triumph of Barbarism
Kerron Ó Luain
What the “White Irish Slaves” Meme Tells Us About Identity Politics
Andy Piascik
Grocery Store Workers Take on Billion Dollar Multinational
Seiji Yamada – Gregory G. Maskarinec
Health as a Human Right: No Migrants Need Apply
Howard Lisnoff
Loose Bullets and Loose Cannons
Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada
Dreaming in Miami
Graham Peebles
Consuming Stuff: The Polluting World of Fashion
Robert Dodge
Earth Day: Our Planet in Peril
Weekend Edition
April 19, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Andrew Levine
What Will It Take For Trump to Get His Due?
Roy Eidelson
Is the American Psychological Association Addicted to Militarism and War?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Time is Blind, Man is Stupid
Joshua Frank
Top 20 Mueller Report “Findings”
Rob Urie
Why Russiagate Will Never Go Away
Paul Street
Stephen Moore Gets Something Right: It’s Capitalism vs. Democracy
Russell Mokhiber
Why Boeing and Its Executives Should be Prosecuted for Manslaughter
T.J. Coles
The Battle for Latin America: How the U.S. Helped Destroy the “Pink Tide”
Ron Jacobs
Ho Chi Minh City: Nguyen Thai Binh Street
Dean Baker
Fun Fictions in Economics
David Rosen
Trump’s One-Dimensional Gender Identity
Kenn Orphan
Notre Dame: We Have Always Belonged to Her
Robert Hunziker
The Blue Ocean Event and Collapsing Ecosystems
Theodore C. Van Alst, Jr.
Paddy Wagon
Brett Wilkins
Jimmy Carter: US ‘Most Warlike Nation in History of the World’
John W. Whitehead
From Jesus Christ to Julian Assange: When Dissidents Become Enemies of the State
Nick Pemberton
To Never Forget or Never Remember
Stephen Cooper
My Unforgettable College Stabbings
Louis Proyect
A Leftist Rejoinder to the “Capitalist Miracle”
Louisa Willcox
Aldo Leopold’s Land Ethic and the Need for a New Approach to Managing Wildlife
Brian Cloughley
Britain Shakes a Futile Fist and Germany Behaves Sensibly
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail